Reply codes in the smtp-ssl draft

"Jeff Stephenson (Exchange)" <[email protected]> Wed, 14 May 1997 10:04:09 -0700
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.apps-tls
Message-ID <B0837A2A72C8D01181CB00805FD459C80BABF9@POPDOG>
The 554 reply code in the draft, if it really is to be an indication of
a temporary condition, should be changed to something like 453.  The '5'
prefix indicates a permanent failure which will not succeed on retry,
whereas the '4' prefix indicates a temporary condition.

The 560 reply code, as has been pointed out over on the ietf-smtp list,
is also probably not appropriate.  Perhaps 555 would be a better choice.
Even better, perhaps it's time to come up with some codes which mean
"here's the general category of response - for more information, check
out the enhanced status code per RFC 1893 and RFC 2034."

-- jeff